Fewer than half (48.5%) of those aged 25 to 64 with no qualifications were in employment compared with 8 in 10 (80.7%) of those with at least one qualification.

While there was only a small difference in employment rates between the two highest levels of qualification, 2+ A Levels or equivalent (83.5%) and degree level or above (85.3%), those aged 25 to 64 with a degree level or above qualification were more likely to work in occupations with higher earnings.

The unemployment rate for both men (12.9%) and women (10.8%) aged 25 to 64 with no qualifications was more than double the rate for those with at least one qualification (5.2% for men, 4.3% for women).

The range of employment rates across local authorities was widest for those aged 25 to 64 with no qualifications (37.2 percentage points) and narrowed as the qualification level increased, with the narrowest range for those with a degree level or above (11.3 percentage points).

All five local authorities with the highest employment rates for those aged 25 to 64 with no qualifications were rural areas, with the highest rate in Eden at 67.2%, whereas all five with the lowest employment rates for those with no qualifications were urban areas, with four of these being in Inner London and the lowest being Tower Hamlets at 30.0%.

In England and Wales, the ‘higher managerial and professional’ occupation category had the lowest proportion of workers with severe disabilities in 2011.

An examination of the rates of ‘Limited a Lot’ from the 2011 Census show a pattern of increasing prevalence with decreasing occupational advantage. This infographic produced by ONS illustrates how people with more severe disabilities are distributed across the socio-economic position of occupations, and their analysis provides an insight into what extent disabled individuals can access jobs in higher classified occupations following recent Equality legislation.

Key points

The rates of disability prevalence vary substantially by socio-economic class throughout England and Wales.

There is a marked North-South divide in disability prevalence rates; rates were generally higher in the North and Wales for all socio-economic classes.

Men and women in the least advantaged ‘routine’ occupations had the highest rates of disability in every English region and Wales (while the most advantaged ‘higher managerial and professional’ occupations had the lowest rates), although some cross over is observed at local authority level.

The regional inequality in disability prevalence is mostly larger for men, except for Wales where it is larger for women.

The London Borough of Islington had the largest inequality in disability prevalence between occupational classes for both men and women; a difference of 29.4 and 26.5 percentage points respectively.

The local authorities with the largest inequality in disability prevalence are generally found in large population centres such as Inner London or in former heavy industrial centres of South Wales.

This annual report by the New Policy Institute gives a comprehensive picture of poverty in the UK, featuring analysis of low income, unemployment, low pay, homelessness and ill health.

A focus on the geographical distribution of disadvantage reveals that national averages mask huge variations between areas in unemployment, educational achievement, and life expectancy.

The research shows that:

more than half of the 13 million people living in poverty in the UK in 2011/12 were in a working family;

while the labour market has shown signs of revival in the last year, the number of people in low-paid jobs has risen and average incomes have fallen – around five million people are paid below the living wage;

there is substantial movement in and out of work – 4.8 million different people have claimed Jobseeker’s Allowance in the last two years;

the proportion of pensioners in poverty is at its lowest for almost 30 years, but the proportion of working-age adults without children in poverty is the highest on record.

A new report published today provides Bradford Council and its partners, citizens and businesses with accurate and up-to-date information about the district. The report offers a descriptive analysis of the district and highlights issues and trends that need to be addressed to make Bradford a better place to live and work.. A shorter summary and ‘in your pocket’ guide are also available.

Key findings

With a population of 524,600, Bradford is the fourth largest district in England, after Birmingham, Leeds and Sheffield.

Bradford’s economy is £8.3 billion, constituting a fifth of West Yorkshire’s economic output and businesses. Between 2008 and 2011, Bradford’s growth was more than twice the regional average and also higher than UK growth.

Educational attainment is improving year on year with the rate of improvement for achieving five or more good GCSEs at grades A*-C including Maths and English accelerating faster than the national average.

Qualification levels are still lower than the regional and national averages.

Social work interventions regarding children in need of care and protection has fallen, with 345 referrals per 10,000 population compared to the English average of 533 referrals per 10,000 population.

We have a low proportion of social housing compared to regionally and nationally, but 99.9% of the stock meets the Decent Homes standard.

We have maintained consistent levels of resident satisfaction; the Office of the Crime Commissioner found that over the last three years the percentage of people who said they were satisfied with their local area has been between 70% and 71%.

Regular volunteering and civic participation are above the national averages demonstrating high levels of active citizenship.

Using recently published 2011 Census data the Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity has analysed ethnic differences in labour market participation for men and women aged 25 to 49 in England and Wales.

Summary findings

The White ethnic groups(with the marked exception of the Gypsy or Irish Traveller group) were in a more advantaged position in the labour market compared with other ethnic groups.

This advantage is apparent from rates of economic activity and unemployment. For economic activity, only Indian men and Black Caribbean women had a similar rate to the White ethnic groups. For unemployment, Pakistani men had rates that were one and a half times the rate for White British men, and Black Caribbean men had rates almost three times as high. Pakistani women’s unemployment rate was more than three times White British women’s, and for Black Caribbean women, unemployment was more than twice White British women’s.

Women had lower rates of economic activity than men in all ethnic groups. However, this difference was greatest for Bangladeshi (87% for men vs. 40% for women), Pakistani (88% vs. 43%), Arab (69% vs. 40%) and White Gypsy or Irish Traveller (67% vs. 41%) groups.

The White Gypsy or Irish Traveller group was particularly disadvantaged. Both men and women had very low rates of economic activity (67% for men and 41% for women) and very high rates of unemployment (16% for men and 19% for women).

Men and women in each of the Black and Mixed Black ethnic groups, except for Black Caribbean women, had high rates of unemployment.

One third of Bangladeshi economically active men were in part-time work, a surprisingly high rate that was equivalent to that for Bangladeshi women.

There is a distinct mismatch between the expectations of employers and young people in the recruitment process, recent Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) research has revealed.

This conflict of understanding hinders entry to the labour market for young jobseekers and contributes to high rates of youth unemployment, the institute has warned.

It also fuels a “ticking time bomb” of skills shortages for UK businesses, who might be unwittingly limiting their access to a diverse pool of talent in the 16-24 age group.

The report available here identified a number of flash points that hindered young people from finding work, which included the “vicious cycle” of employers asking for workplace experience for entry level roles.